Scenario assumptions for the TIMER Emissions Model

The assumptions for the different SRES energy scenarios in the TIMER emissions model are based on the corresponding marker scenarios published by IPCC (2000) and their story lines. A general explanation and specific assumptions are listed for:

• Energy production and use (CH4, NMVOC)
• Electric power generation (SO2, NOx, CO)
• Transport (N2O, SO2, NOx , CO, NMVOC)
• Industrial sources (N2O, SO2, NOx , CO, NMVOC)
• Emissions of halocarbons

Energy production and use (CH4 and NMVOC emissions)

Gas leakages & venting

The emission factor CH4 from gas production (gas leakage and venting) decreases after a stabilization period as a result of technological improvement towards the level of the technological frontier (OECD countries) in a specified target year. The emission factor of the technological frontier also decreases with time in a linear fashion till 50% of its 1995 level by 2050 (A1 and B1) and till 75% by 2075 (B2). For the A2 scenario the emission factor for the technological frontier is constant. The emission factor for NMVOC from gas production follows that of CH4. The assumptions on CH4 emission factors are summarized below.

CH4 emission factor for gas leakage and venting
	OECD	Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe	Asia	Rest of World (Latin America, Africa)
A1, B1	Constant till 2000, then convergence in 2045	Constant till 2030, then convergence in 2055 (Eastern Europe) and 2100 (former Soviet Union)	Same pattern as Eastern Europe	Constant till 2045, then convergence in 2075 (20 years later)
A2, B2	Constant till 2025, then convergence in the period 2075-2100	Constant till 2050-2075, then convergence in 2100	Constant till 2075, then convergence in 2100	Constant till 2075, then convergence in 2100

Oil production

The future trends in the emission factor for CH4 from oil production are the same as those for gas leakage and venting. The emission factor for NMVOC from oil production follows that for CH4.

Coal mining

The emission factor of CH4 from coal mining depends on the ratio surface mining : total coal mining, and the emission factors for underground and surface mining. The emission factor for underground mining is 5-20 times higher (region-dependent) than that for surface mining. Both factors decline in the course of time as a result of technological improvements, using similar trends as assumed for the emission factors for gas venting and leakages. Many existing (deep) coal-mines in Europe are being closed, while there may be an increase in surface mining in many exporting countries with low-cost coal reserves near the surface. The combination of both trends, decreasing fraction deep-coal mining and an increasing fraction of surface coal mining, is expected to result in an overall decrease in the emission factors of coal mining. Due to increasing total volumes of coal mining, this will not always lead to a reduction of total CH4 emissions. In all scenarios, except for B1, the emissions for the period 1995-2100 exceed the 1995 emission levels.

Fraction of surface mining (calculated by TIMER)
	OECD	Non-OECD
		Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe	Asia	Rest of World (Latin America, Africa)
	1995-value
	0.6	0.5	0.3	0.8
A1B, A1F	Increases with 0.1-0.3 in 2100	Increases with 0.2-0.3 in 2100	Increases with 0.6-0.8 by 2100	Decreases with ~0.5 by 2100
A1T	Increases with 0.2-0.3	Increases with 0.2-0.3	Increases with 0.6-0.8	Decreases with ~0.4
A2	Decreases with 0.1-0.3	Increases with ~0.1	Increases with 0.1-0.3	Decreases with ~0.4
B1	Increases with 0.2-0.3	Increases with 0.2-0.3	Increases with 0.6-0.8	Slight decrease
B2	Increases with 0.1-0.2	Increases with 0.2-0.2	Increases with ~0.4	Decreases with ~0.3

Electric power generation (SO2, NOx)

For the near-term (2010-2020) the emissions of SO2 and NOx for OECD countries follow the formulated emission reduction targets formulated in the UN-ECE Gothenburg protocol for Europe, and the Amendments of the Clean Air Act in the USA. We assumed only minor differences in the scenario-assumptions till 2010, except for certain delays in the implementation of abatement policies in A2. Despite these assumptions emission targets may not be achieved due to the difficulty to abate NOx emissions in a fast-growing transport sector.

For the long-term various trends of sulphur and NOx emissions control policies are implemented, which depend on income, the environmental awareness and environmental impacts in line with the narrative of the scenario. The abatement policy in the OECD countries acts as a technological frontier for the other non-OECD regions (i.e., convergence to a specific OECD level.

Reduction and timing of reduction of emission factors for NOx from power generation (coal)
	OECD	Non-OECD
		Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe	Asia	Rest of World (Latin America, Africa)
A1B, A1F, A1T	Moderate-strong reduction (delayed)	Convergence to final-OECD level. Timing depends mainly on the income-level
	OECD Europe: 50% reduction of 1995-level by 2035. Other OECD regions follow 15 years later.	Former Soviet Union: 2050 Eastern Europe: 2020	2100	2100
A2	Slow reduction	Convergence to 1995-OECD level by 2050-2100, but no convergence for the low-income regions
	OECD Europe: 25% reduction of '95-levels in 2035 (25 years delay). Other OECD regions reach 1995-level of OECD Europe in 2100.	Former Soviet Union: 2100 Eastern Europe: 2020	2100	Latin America: 2100 Africa: no convergence
B1	Strong reduction (early action)	Convergence to final-OECD level; timing depends mainly on the environmental awareness
	OECD Europe: 50% reduction of '95-levels in 2010; 75% reduction in 2035. Other OECD regions follow 15 years later.	Former Soviet Union: 2100 Eastern Europe: 2050	2075	2100
B2	Moderate reduction (delayed)	Convergence to final-OECD level; timing depends mainly on the environmental awareness and GDP
	Same as B1, but 25 year later	Former Soviet Union: after 2100 Eastern Europe: 2100	2100	Latin America: 2100 Africa: no convergence

Emission factors for SO2 from coal combustion depend primarily on the implementation of Flue Gas Desulphurization (FGD), which is related to the on the Willingness-to-Pay parameter (WTP). The timing of convergence to the final level of the OECD mainly depends on the income-level (A1), environmental awareness (B1), both factors (B1), and serious environmental impacts (A2).

• A1: Maximum FGD is 95%; the WTP parameter for the A1B is parameterized on the basis of the assumed trend in FGD.

For the other scenarios the WTP value of the A1 scenarios is modified, leading to FDG levels indicated in the table below, as follows:

• A2: the rate of convergence of the WTP parameters is somewhat slower and the final WTP levels are lower than for A1
• B1: the WTP values are higher for the OECD, Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe than for A1, while the WTP values for the rest of the world converge within 50 years towards the final OECD levels
• B2: the rate of convergence is somewhat slower and the final levels are lower than for B1. Hence, the B2 values for WTP are more comparable with the A1 values

Maximum FGD level and target year for reaching that level SO2 emissions from coal combustion
	All regions	OECD	Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe	Asia	Rest of World (Latin America, Africa)
	Maximum FDG level	Target year
A1B, A1F, A1T	95%	2010-2020	Eastern Europe: 2020 Former Soviet Union: 2060	2050-2080	Latin America: 2050-2080 Africa: 2100
A2	80%; 95% for OECD Europe and Japan	2020-2035	Eastern Europe: 2050 Former Soviet Union: 2100	2100	Latin America: 2100 Africa: no convergence
B1	95%	2010	Eastern Europe: 2030 Former Soviet Union: 2050	2030-2050	Latin America: 2050 Africa: 2070
B2	95%	2015-2020	Eastern Europe: 2030 Former Soviet Union: 2080	2040-2060	Latin America: 2070-2080 Africa: no convergence

Transport (N2O, SO2, NOx , CO, NMVOC)

• N2O: The emission factors for national transport sources (energy carrier: LLF, i.e. gasoline) depend on the fraction catalyst-equipped cars of the total vehicle fleet, their age, and the technological developments of these three-way catalytic converters. We assume that the catalysts in the OECD regions act as a technological frontier for the catalysts of the non-OECD regions. The emissions factor of the technological frontier, reaches about 25% of the 1995 levels by 2035 (A1, B1), 50% by 2050 (B2) and 75% by 2050 (A2). The fraction catalyst-equipped cars of the vehicle fleet is assumed to reach 100% in a scenario-specific target year:

Year in which 100% of cars will be equipped with catalysts
	OECD		Non-OECD
	Canada, USA and Japan	Western-Europe and Oceania	Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe	Asia	Rest of World (Latin America, Africa)
A1	1990	2000-2010	2025-2045	2035-2045	2035-2045
A2	1990	2025-2035	2075-2100	After 2100	After 2100
B1	1990	2000-2010	2015-2035	2015-2025	2025-2045
B2	1990	2010-2025	2025-2050	2035-2045	2045-2065

• CO, NOx and NMVOC. For the near-term (2010-2020) the emissions for OECD countries are based on the formulated emission reduction targets according to current national and international emission policies. For OECD Europe we follow the 2005 EU-standards for new cars, assuming a reduction by 60-70% for the emission factors for CO, NOx, NMVOC for petrol (LLF) compared to 1995, and a reduction by 50% for diesel (HLF). For B1 and B2 we assumed complete implementation of these standards, whereas in A1 and A2 only a 60-75% implementation is achieved.
  For the long-term the trends of CO, NOx, NMVOC control policies for the transportation sector depend on income, the environmental awareness and environmental impacts in line with the narrative of the scenario. More specifically, for the various scenarios we assumed that the abatement policy in Japan and OECD Europe acts as a technological frontier for the other non-OECD regions, i.e. convergence to (close to) the final OECD-level. We assumed that due to insufficient maintenance conditions of the catalysts applications in less-industrialized regions the emission factors converge to levels of 5-20% above the final OECD-level. The table below describes the trends in the emissions factors of CO for transport for LLF for the various emission scenarios. The emission factor for the other gases and energy carriers, i.e. gas and HLF show similar trends. In general, the emission factors for these gases and energy carriers follow the same trend as the diffusion rate of catalysts in the vehicle fleet (see previous table).

Emission factors for CO from transportation (LLF)
	OECD	Non-OECD
		Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe	Asia	Rest of World (Latin America, Africa)
	Reduction of emission factor	Year in which the emissions factor reach a level of 5-20% above the final OECD-level*
A1B, A1F, A1T	OECD Europe and Japan: 50% of '95-level of Japan in 2025 (~25% of 1995-level of OECD Europe). Other OECD 10-15 years later.	Former Soviet Union: 2075 Eastern Europe: 2050	2050	Latin America: 2075 Africa: 2100
A2	OECD Europe and Japan: reach 2010-levels (B1) in 2050. Other regions remain above level of OECD Europe	2100.	Converge to 2010-level of OECD Europe by 2100	2100
B1	OECD Europe and Japan: 30% of '95-level of Japan in 2025 (~10% of 1995-level of OECD Europe). Other OECD 10-15 years later.	Former Soviet Union: 2050 Eastern Europe: 2035	2035	Latin America: 2050 Africa: 2075
B2	OECD Europe and Japan: 50% of '95-level of Japan in 2025 (~25% of 1995-level of OECD Europe). Other OECD 10-15 years later.	Same as A1	Same as A1	Same as A1
* The timing of convergence depends on the income level (A1), environmental awareness (B1), both factors (B1), and serious environmental impacts (A2).

Industrial sources (N2O, SO2, NOx , CO, NMVOC)

Adipic acid production (N2O)

The estimates of N2O emissions from adipic acid production were taken directly from the IPCC-SRES emission scenarios (Fenhann, 1999).

Nitric acid production (N2O)

The emission factor of N2O emissions from nitric acid production primarily depends on the fraction Non-Selective Catatalyst reduction of NOx (NCSR). The emission factor for N2O from nitric acid production with no NCSR is about a factor 16 higher than that for production with modern NCSR techniques. The fraction NCSR is assumed to increase on the basis of the implementation of national and international environmental policies, or technology transfer from the OECD regions to the other non-OECD regions (see table below).

Fraction Non-Selective Catalyst reduction for NOx and target year (NCSR)
	OECD	Non-OECD
		Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe	Asia	Rest of World (Latin America, Africa)
A1	10 years later than B1	10 years later than B1	10 years later than in B1	10 years later than in B1
A2	35 years later than in B1	35 years later than in B1	35 years later than in B1	35 years later than in B1
B1	1995: 30% 2010: 60% 2030:90% 2050 100%	1995: 0% 2010: 30% 2050: 60% 2080: 100%	10 years later than Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe	10 years later than Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe
B2	Same as A2	Same as A2	Same as A2	Same as A2

Steel production (CO, NOx, CH4 and NMVOC)

The emission factors for CO from steel production decrease in the course of time due to technological improvements for the various emission scenarios, in line with the narratives. The emission factors for the other compounds for steel production follow the trend of CO emissions.

Emissions factors of CO for steel production
	OECD	Non-OECD
		Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe	Asia	Rest of World (Latin America, Africa)
A1	10 years later than in B1	10 years later than in B1	10 years later than in B1	10 years later than in B1
A2	35 years later than in B1	35 years later than in B1	35 years later than in B1	35 years later than in B1
B1	Decreasing emission factors towards '95-level of USA between 2000-2025, afterwards 15% lower by 2075.	1995: High values for Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe; same convergence as in the OECD, but 10 years later (2010-2035)	Same convergence as in OECD, but 25 years later (2025-2050)	Latin America and North Africa: low values Rest Africa: same as Asia.
B2	Same as A2	Same as A2	Same as A2	Same as A2

Emissions of halocarbons

The emissions of halocarbons (i.e. the CFCs, HCFCs, halons, carbon tetra chloride and methyl chloroform) are regulated in the Montreal Protocol scenario (A3) of WMO (1999). The emissions of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) are included in the Kyoto Protocol with the gases CO2, CH4 and N2O, and their future emissions for the six scenarios are based on Fenhann (2000). More specifically, the future HFC emissions depend on the 'virtual' future CFC emissions (assuming a situation without the Montreal Protocol), and assumptions on substitution percentages for the CFC applications, the degree of emission reduction potentials as a result of better housekeeping and technological developments.

The future emissions of perfluorocarbons (PFCs) are strongly related to the future demand for aluminum. This demand depends on the consumption elasticity related to GDP and assumptions concerning recycling rates, as well as technological developments determining the emission factors. The future emissions of sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) from high-voltage electrical equipment (about 80% in 1990) depend on the future electricity demand and emission reduction potentials (resulting from recovery, recycling and substitution). The SF6 emissions from magnesium production (about 20% in 1990) depend on the demand for magnesium and reduction potentials.

Substitution of halocarbons by HFCs and PFCs*
Application	From	HFC-32	HFC-43-10	HFC-125	HFC-134a	HFC-143a	HFC-227ea	HFC-245ca	C4F10	Total
Aerosols/propellants	CFC				4%		4%			8%
Cleaning/drying	CFC		0.5%							0.5%
Open cell foams	CFC									0%
Closed cell foams	CFC				25%			25%		50%
Stationary cooling	CFC	2%		5%	25%	5%				37%
Stationary cooling	HCFC-22	2%		5%	25%	5%				37%
Mobile cooling	CFC				25%					25%
Fire extinguisher (portable)	Halon1211						1%			1%
Fire extinguisher (fixed)	Halon1301						25%			25%
Other uses	CFC			5%	5%					10%
Source: IPCC (2000) * The substitution of CFC application by HFC-23, HFC-152a and HFC-236fa is assumed to play a minor role.